Print

Print


On 24/04/2012 15:35, Tom Fine wrote:
> Hi Ted:
>
> But 35 millimeters = 1.37795276 inches.
>
> So either the reporter completely confused what he was seeing (or 
> hearing) or there was 35mm film in use.
>
> Are there any Abbey Road veterans from that time on the list?
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ted Kendall" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] EMI, opera and 35mm?
>
>
>> On 24/04/2012 14:47, Tom Fine wrote:
>>> So they don't mean sprocketed magnetic film?
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ted Kendall" 
>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:40 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] EMI, opera and 35mm?
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 24/04/2012 13:27, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>>> I came across this blurb in May 1968 High Fidelity:
>>>>> http://www.yousendit.com/download/M3Brc2ZPK3g3bUJEZU1UQw?cid=tx-02002207340200000000&s=19102 
>>>>>
>>>>> (paste full link into browser if it's split by e-mail)
>>>>>
>>>>> The part from London, about Klemperer recording Wagner for EMI, 
>>>>> starts at the bottom of the first page.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the top of the second page, the piece reports that "35-mm tape 
>>>>> (is used) when separate systems were being used for voices and 
>>>>> instruments."
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any EMI veterans on this list who can tell me more about 
>>>>> this technique? How long was it used? Aside from the Klemperer 
>>>>> Wagner opera recording, what other records were made using this 
>>>>> technique? Was it ever detailed or used as a marketing hook in EMI 
>>>>> advertising or album-notes?
>>>>>
>>>>> Finally, do any EMI veterans have photos of the setup, showing the 
>>>>> 35mm equipment?
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>> I'm pretty certain this would be one inch tape on Studer J37s, of 
>>>> which Abbey Road had several at the time, although there was a 
>>>> similar Telefunken machine as well. Four tracks gave one pair for 
>>>> voices and one for orchestra.
>>>>
>>>
>> Not as far as I know - I have not come across any other suggestion 
>> that this was used there, and the technical climate was quite 
>> conservative at the time.
>>
>
Agreed, but equally the man refers to tape rather than film, and "35mm" 
could easily be a typo or mistranscription of "25mm", which of course is 
one inch. I should imagine that he would not mistake a tape machine for 
a film transport. On the other hand, would the difference between 25 and 
35mm be obvious when seen across a room?